marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 We are basically aruging a subject that is moot Geocaching.com controls what they offer so why are we even arguing Geocaching.com exists to serve its users. Anything that helps elucidate what its users want is a useful topic in the forums. If you think this topic is moot, why are you posting here? Link to comment
+TheCollector Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 We are basically aruging a subject that is moot Geocaching.com controls what they offer so why are we even arguing Geocaching.com exists to serve its users. Anything that helps elucidate what its users want is a useful topic in the forums. If you think this topic is moot, why are you posting here? Cause I like to Argue Link to comment
nobby.nobbs Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 okay admit i've not waded through the whole of this thread mainly as it's been gone over before... however what with the online maps, online aerial photos and the clues on the cache page it's possible for idiots who just want to ruin the hobby to find caches without a gps. i haven't got any but i can see a situation arising where all caches are going to have to go premium only to prevent this from happening. apart from that i can see what you are saying but really it comes down to the basis that life ain't fair. get over it. it's up to the cache owners. i don't like micros... does that give me the right to demand that all caches are ammo boxes? Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 1) ...Bad theory. Really bad theory. All it takes is one intelligent vandal seeing one cacher to give away the location 2) ....If the area is that sensitive, there probably should not be a cache there at all. It's worth correctiong a couple of mispeceptions. 1) This isn't a theory. It's an observed fact that PMO caches are safer from intensional cache maggotry. There is no sure thing, but this helps. 2) If the area is sensative then a touch less traffic may be all that's needed. Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 ...What do all of you think? Personally I find that I really don't care about this particular issue. However it's intereting to note that at least one Land Manager agrees (though perhaps for different reasons) and has banned PMO caches on their grounds. Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 1) This isn't a theory. It's an observed fact that PMO caches are safer from intensional cache maggotry. There is no sure thing, but this helps. Really? If so, this is interesting, to say the least. What sort of evidence do we have for this? 2) If the area is sensative then a touch less traffic may be all that's needed. Unfortunately, our current system doesn't really allow the level of granularity that would provide "a touch less traffic". Link to comment
+EraSeek Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Personally, I like how Geocaching is set up now as is. Those who do not wish to pay to play, may. Fine by me. They are welcome members of the community, and likewise they should be greatfull that they have free access to the game. Those who wish more from Geocaching or wish to support the site as I do, may, and are more than welcome to participate in any of the extra benefits that paid membership brings. What in heaven's name is unfair about that? I don't think that Icefall is some sort of socialist (though many people do fall into that trap these days), nor are "members only caches" some sort of heartless elitism. I think it is simply that people take so much for granted these days that they think everything is or should be a right or it is unfair. People simply need to reflect more on what rights are. You have a right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, equal justice, and your independant beliefs. That's about it. And these are tenuous as well. All else is either a privilege or a blessing, often taken for granted. Even our institutions have forgotten this. Is education a right? No. It is a privilege and a blessing, like driving a car. Don't follow proper behaviorial rules and that privilage should be reduced or removed for the safety and well-being of others. It is not unfair to pay or not pay $30. It is a choice. Respect it either way. It is not unfair to have a MOC for any reason. It is a benefit that comes with supporting geocaching that may be used as the cache owner sees fit. Respect it. It is not a right to have a FTF open to everyone. It is the choice of the cache owner of how he wants to set up his cache. First to Finds have nothing to do with rights. It is part of a silly game we play which has nothing to do with rights. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are much more profound things than this divergent little occupation of ours. I have placed MOCs before. I usually have a very good reason for doing so. Often to reduce traffic to the site, or limit it to experienced cachers who may be more carefull that those with less experience. Most often it is to limit the harm to the surrounding area. Yet, whatever the reason, it is the privilage of the cache owner to set up his cache as he sees fit. If that truely causes harm to others or the area or the community of cachers, then his privilge to do as he sees fit will be reduced or removed. Good question kid. It has provoked some discussion and thought. My advice to anyone is never take anything for granted as a right. Never take your rights for granted. Never confuse you privileges with your rights, nor your rights with your blessings. In the end they are all just blessings. Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 1) This isn't a theory. It's an observed fact that PMO caches are safer from intensional cache maggotry. There is no sure thing, but this helps. Really? If so, this is interesting, to say the least. What sort of evidence do we have for this? 2) If the area is sensative then a touch less traffic may be all that's needed. Unfortunately, our current system doesn't really allow the level of granularity that would provide "a touch less traffic". Direct Observation in an environment where PMO Caches lived and Non PMO Caches didn't. Pretty straight forward. We even had a period where the Cache Maggot became a PM to steal PMO caches. A PMO cache won't stop a random find. It will stop anyone who is not willing to pony up the money, or stalk a cacher. Our current system is perfectly cabable of "No cache traffic", "PM Cache Traffic" and "Open Cache Traffic". If your level of conernt is measured down to the exactly number of hikers that will be permitted, you won't get that fine of a break out. However you can go from "trample" to "light use". It is a tool, useful within its limits. Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I think it is simply that people take so much for granted these days that they think everything is or should be a right or it is unfair. Speaking only for myself, my dislike of PMOCs has nothing to do with thinking that "everything...should be a right". I certainly do not think that. I simply think that it's possible that GC.com has drawn the line between free and paid in the wrong place here. I don't know why this raises so many people's hackles. Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) 1) This isn't a theory. It's an observed fact that PMO caches are safer from intensional cache maggotry. There is no sure thing, but this helps. Really? If so, this is interesting, to say the least. What sort of evidence do we have for this? [...] Direct Observation in an environment where PMO Caches lived and Non PMO Caches didn't. Pretty straight forward. It certainly sounds so, assuming there's nothing else confounding the issue. Would you mind telling me the approximate area? I'd be extremely curious to look over the logs around there. We even had a period where the Cache Maggot became a PM to steal PMO caches. Which would seem to imply that PMO status may not be as good a protection as might be guessed. Personally, I'm kind of surprised that someone would bother paying money to be a cache maggot. Or was this person an otherwise serious cacher who happened also to have some undesirable traits? A PMO cache won't stop a random find. It will stop anyone who is not willing to pony up the money, or stalk a cacher. Right. It will also stop a lot of law-abiding cachers who aren't ready to pony up quite yet. There's gotta be a better way of doing this... Our current system is perfectly cabable of "No cache traffic", "PM Cache Traffic" and "Open Cache Traffic". If your level of conernt is measured down to the exactly number of hikers that will be permitted, you won't get that fine of a break out. However you can go from "trample" to "light use". It is a tool, useful within its limits. Perhaps. Seems pretty marginal to me. Edited May 7, 2007 by marnen Link to comment
+TheCollector Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) marnen you have only 8 caches there are only 7 PMOC out of the 400 closes caches to you so i think you will survive Edited May 7, 2007 by TheCollector Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) That's true but irrelevant. I'm arguing this more on general principles than on how it would affect me personally -- which is why I said that offering to buy Icefall a month of premium membership missed the point as far as I was concerned. (Of course, I'm not Icefall, so I have no idea if he feels the same way, but that's how I'd react if the offer had been made to me.) Edited May 7, 2007 by marnen Link to comment
vtmtnman Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I know of a few cachers who get the page published, set the cache for PMs only, and then enable it for everyone as soon as it has an FTF. Those are the caches I really don't like. I think we should all have a fair chance at getting an FTF, regardless of what cache it is or who the hider is. It also is unfair to some groups of people. For instance, and I do not want to get into a debate about pricing and whether this is cheap or expensive, but for some people $30 a year for a premium membership may be too much. I am a kid, and I can neither afford it nor get parental permission to mail the payment in or use a credit card. For kids, at least kids like me who can't get a membership, PMOs are completely unfair. What do all of you think? It's fair that I'm a paying member and I'm in Iraq with no more caches to find?I guess GC.com should refund my money then? I agree with Kitfox 100%.This is a common theme with today's people,adults and kids alike.ME ME ME...Get a job.There's tons of ways to make money...especially a measly thirty dollars. You're also indicating that cache placers should be dictated to who can find their cache.I personally believe in the MOC till an FTF.You spend the money to play,so that's another perk when you pay for a membership. This is basically not what you wanted to hear,but as the Dennis Leary song goes"Life's gonna suck when you grow up when you grow up and it sucks pretty bad right now!" Link to comment
hodnej_pan Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 There's one aspect none has mentioned so far. I'm moving to a new place and the cache closest to it is a PMO. I don't have a problem with PMOs as such - actually this is the only one I've ever come across - but it is located i a very nice area that - in my opinion - deserves more attention from cachers. Placing a PMO cache in such a place kind of "locks out" the whole area for non-PM people. So no problem with PMO till FTF, but i guess the owner of this one made it PMO just to show off (since not many cachers here are PM). As for entitlement - I'm considering becoming a PM but I'd never do it to unlock PMOs. My only motivation would be to support GC.com and to gain access to those extra functions (though I'm not sure I really do need them). Link to comment
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Life isn't fair...I don't know how you can think you should get all the benefits paying members do for nothing. If you cannot afford $3 a month, you cannot afford caching. Well stated. Besides, even when I was age 13, back in the sixties, when dollars were worth a lot more and were a lot more scarce, I made over $4 per day in earnings, which came to over $120 per month and over $1,400 per year. If you cannot afford $3 per month, you CERTAINLY cannot afford to be a geocacher! Link to comment
+mamid Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 when I was 12, I had a paperroute for spending money. I used it to buy comics, clothes, and other things I needed. by 13, I was babysitting all the time. at 16, I got my first fast food restaurant job. so why not get a paperroute? You'd be able to afford a premimum membership after a month. (a friend has promised to buy one for me for my birthday, but that's besides the point... or not. add it to your wish list.) Link to comment
+ArtieD Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 By the way...where/how did you get your GPSr? Did you buy it yourself or did someone give it to you? It might explain some of your entitlement attitude. However...I will forgive you for said attitude. At that age, most kids think like you do. Link to comment
+larryc43230 Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 No one has yet mentioned the reason I published my first three caches as MOCs. I didn't care one bit whether a premium member or non-paying member found the caches first. If a cache is members-only, the owner has the ability to view a log of who has visited the cache Web page. I thought it would be fun to see who was interested in my new caches. I published the three caches as members-only, monitored the log for a few days, and then changed the caches to non-members-only so anyone could see the listing and go after them. Yes, that might have prevented a non-paying member from getting the FTF, but the e-mail notification feature that's available only to premium members pretty much guaranteed that a premium member would find it first anyway. --Larry Link to comment
+PJPeters Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 ...As for entitlement - I'm considering becoming a PM but I'd never do it to unlock PMOs. My only motivation would be to support GC.com and to gain access to those extra functions (though I'm not sure I really do need them). And that, right there, is the big reason. The added bennies are just icing on the cake. ...If a cache is members-only, the owner has the ability to view a log of who has visited the cache Web page. I thought it would be fun to see who was interested in my new caches. ... Didn't know that. Interesting. Link to comment
+CSpenceFLY Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) Lighten up Francis. Thats funny, the post I was responding to is gone. Edited May 7, 2007 by CSpenceFLY Link to comment
+Kit Fox Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 1) ...Bad theory. Really bad theory. All it takes is one intelligent vandal seeing one cacher to give away the location 2) ....If the area is that sensitive, there probably should not be a cache there at all. It's worth correctiong a couple of mispeceptions. 1) This isn't a theory. It's an observed fact that PMO caches are safer from intensional cache maggotry. There is no sure thing, but this helps. 2) If the area is sensative then a touch less traffic may be all that's needed. I've personally hidden 99 geocaches. Many start out as PMOC, and some will change to regular caches over time. Several times, when I changed my pmocs to regular caches, they disappeared. None of the caches that walked away were in busy areas, so the I doubt the muggle theory applied. I spoke with several other cachers who lost caches in the same area, and all were regular caches. When you take the time and money to hide nice caches, you want them to last a long time. Making caches PMOCs is not 100 percent effective at preventing their disappearance. Me personally, I make my caches even more exclusive then PMOCs. I make them 4.5 star terrain caches, so I can weed out all but the most physically fit geocachers. I also make some of my puzzles so hard that you have to have a degree in cryptography in order to find them. Marnen, If you think PMOC caches aren't fair because they can't be found by everyone, then what are your thoughts on puzzle caches, and high terrain caches? Link to comment
+SgtSue Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 PMOC caches and zoom map zoom ability are what enticed me to first pay for my membership. PQs, bookmark lists, and the other paid for benefits are what keep my $30 coming in every year. I’ve learned generally PMOC caches are not much different than regular caches but that PQs are next to chocolate on the list of things I don’t want to live without. If your budget does not allow for cost of a PM then be happy for all the caches out there that are free. None of us can have everything we want when we want it. Be thankful for what you do have and work toward what you want. You will be much happier in life than complaining that someone has something you don’t have. Link to comment
+beezerb Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 For the purposes of this post (and the rest of this topic if you use them), PM means premium members and PMO is premium member only cache. I really, really think the option to make a cache for PMs only should be eliminated. It is very annoying to search on here, find that a cache has been published that hasn't been there before, only to find that the owner has made it only for PMs. There are many times when this has happened to me, and I know of a few cachers who get the page published, set the cache for PMs only, and then enable it for everyone as soon as it has an FTF. Those are the caches I really don't like. I think we should all have a fair chance at getting an FTF, regardless of what cache it is or who the hider is. It also is unfair to some groups of people. For instance, and I do not want to get into a debate about pricing and whether this is cheap or expensive, but for some people $30 a year for a premium membership may be too much. I am a kid, and I can neither afford it nor get parental permission to mail the payment in or use a credit card. For kids, at least kids like me who can't get a membership, PMOs are completely unfair. What do all of you think? Take your mom caching on Mother's Day, get her hooked, she gets you a PM and starts buying the gas to go caching..... There you go. Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 For the purposes of this post (and the rest of this topic if you use them), PM means premium members and PMO is premium member only cache. I really, really think the option to make a cache for PMs only should be eliminated. It is very annoying to search on here, find that a cache has been published that hasn't been there before, only to find that the owner has made it only for PMs. There are many times when this has happened to me, and I know of a few cachers who get the page published, set the cache for PMs only, and then enable it for everyone as soon as it has an FTF. Those are the caches I really don't like. I think we should all have a fair chance at getting an FTF, regardless of what cache it is or who the hider is. It also is unfair to some groups of people. For instance, and I do not want to get into a debate about pricing and whether this is cheap or expensive, but for some people $30 a year for a premium membership may be too much. I am a kid, and I can neither afford it nor get parental permission to mail the payment in or use a credit card. For kids, at least kids like me who can't get a membership, PMOs are completely unfair. What do all of you think? Most of my hide are for PM only when they are new, I tend to put gift cards fo local stores in them or some cash. Once the premium items are gone I change them to caches for any geocachers. But there are some caches I leave as PM only caches. These are caches that may involve a large cash expenditure to set up, I make those PM only caches to keep the coordinates from those that may intend steal a cache. I have had this happen in the past. Link to comment
+"we two want to play too" Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) Agrees with Beezerb, lol. Hi Icefall! Hubby and I met you last summer at an event. Don't be fooled by the 'from Colorado' line, I'm there, Hubby is still in Michigan. I remember you as being a nice, intelligent, and fun guy who was pretty psyched about caching. Seemes you are getting hit pretty hard by some responders, and are getting alot of support from others. Personally, because of your age, I am sitting here wondering about the FTF issue for you. I know you can't just hop into your car as soon as a new cache gets published....and I'm sure you have to play 'let's make a deal' with your parents in order to get them to drive you around. FTF is only one benefit of membership. I know you would enjoy the other perks a great deal. You're a bells and whistles kind of guy. If you want the FTF, it is going to require a membership in that area. No two ways about it. You cache in a FTF hound area and some of us have ALL the good toys. (not me ) You mention not getting any help from your parents with the membership. I wonder, as a parent, if they do not want you to have it. Perhaps as a way to keep you from getting as addicted as some of us....if that isn't the reason, and they have no obection to you becoming a member, then ask another cacher to help you. You pay them, they put it on the plastic. You shouldn't have any problem with this, you have cached in the area long enough and have placed some fun caches fo rthe rest of us to enjoy. If the issue is money, I agree with the earlier poster who said to get a paper route. Suprisingly decent money. The Holland Sentinel, it seems, is always looking for delivery people in your area. Hubby used to work for them as the Southside DM and if you e-mailed him, he might be able to hook you up. Chin up!! You'll get this figured out! Edited May 7, 2007 by "we two want to play too" Link to comment
4wheelin_fool Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 ..... completely unfair. What do all of you think? Yes, you are absolutely correct. It would be completely unfair to the site admin. to expect them to keep the site running for free. That is what you meant, wasn't it? Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Marnen, If you think PMOC caches aren't fair because they can't be found by everyone, then what are your thoughts on puzzle caches, and high terrain caches? Well, let's get one thing straight. I don't really think PMOCs are unfair -- I just think they're against the inclusive spirit that GC.com seems to promote. I have no such problem with puzzle caches and high-terrain caches. After all, geocaching (for many people) is about the thrill of the hunt. Making the hunt deliberately challenging, either physically or mentally, just provides more fun. And unlike a PMOC, such a cache can still be hunted by anyone willing to take on the challenge. Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 It would be completely unfair to the site admin. to expect them to keep the site running for free. That is what you meant, wasn't it? For the third or fourth time: No one is suggesting abolishing premium membership. Link to comment
vtmtnman Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 ..... completely unfair. What do all of you think? Yes, you are absolutely correct. It would be completely unfair to the site admin. to expect them to keep the site running for free. That is what you meant, wasn't it? Pretty sure that's what he meant Bud..... Link to comment
+pcunningham Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 None of us can have everything we want when we want it. Be thankful for what you do have and work toward what you want. You will be much happier in life than complaining that someone has something you don’t have. A wise quote that bears repeating. Link to comment
+baloo&bd Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) Well stated. Besides, even when I was age 13, back in the sixties, when dollars were worth a lot more and were a lot more scarce, I made over $4 per day in earnings, which came to over $120 per month and over $1,400 per year. If you cannot afford $3 per month, you CERTAINLY cannot afford to be a geocacher! ...and walked to school up hill, both ways, in 3 feet of snow and sweltering heat while carrying 60 pounds of books. PMOC have out lived any usefulness they may have had. Edited May 7, 2007 by baloo&bd Link to comment
+Jhwk Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 wait... wait... wait... Ah, there it is! Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Please, folks, let's try to keep this thread at least moderately civil... Link to comment
+Kit Fox Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Marnen, If you think PMOC caches aren't fair because they can't be found by everyone, then what are your thoughts on puzzle caches, and high terrain caches? Well, let's get one thing straight. I don't really think PMOCs are unfair -- I just think they're against the inclusive spirit that GC.com seems to promote. I have no such problem with puzzle caches and high-terrain caches. After all, geocaching (for many people) is about the thrill of the hunt. Making the hunt deliberately challenging, either physically or mentally, just provides more fun. And unlike a PMOC, such a cache can still be hunted by anyone willing to take on the challenge. If I understand your premise, three dollars per month is all that preventing "free cachers" from having all the fun that "paying cachers" are having. So in your view, a cache that requires rappelling gear, or a 4wd vehicle to access is not exclusive? Have you ever looked into the cost of rappelling gear, or the cost of a 4wd vehicle? This is the highest cache in the lower 48 states. Peak-A-Boo: Mt. Whitney Since it isn't a PMOC, it isn't exclusive in your eyes, but I argue that it is a cache that excludes tens of thousands of cachers. Being able to fork out three bucks won't make this cache available to everyone. Link to comment
+baloo&bd Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 It's fair that I'm a paying member and I'm in Iraq with no more caches to find?I guess GC.com should refund my money then? First, thanks for the service. It is appreciated. It is hard to compare the two. Yours is one of a geographical nature, out of the control of GC. I agree with Kitfox 100%.This is a common theme with today's people,adults and kids alike.ME ME ME...Get a job.There's tons of ways to make money...especially a measly thirty dollars. You're also indicating that cache placers should be dictated to who can find their cache.I personally believe in the MOC till an FTF.You spend the money to play,so that's another perk when you pay for a membership. This is basically not what you wanted to hear,but as the Dennis Leary song goes"Life's gonna suck when you grow up when you grow up and it sucks pretty bad right now!" Look at it another way. The OP sees something that they view as not right. Instead of just whining about it or giving up, they have decided to voice it and see if there is room for change. Hasn't the OP learned the first step that has been taken to most notable changes in business, government and socially? PMOC's serve no useful purpose (yes, I have read the other threads) and seem to cause more angst than they are worth. Luckily I live in an area where they are more or less non-existent. If you give the site money simply in return for the features you gain, then please, take the feature and a thank you but do not hide behind the self righteous "I am supporting the site", your simply buying more perceived product. On another point, there has been very rude comments (not responses) rather than conversation or debate. The rudest of which was expected (not this post, much earlier on) since that seems to be all they post, however try to stay on the topic rather than resorting to personal attacks when you can not think of something else. Link to comment
+JoGPS Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Have about 150+ Members Only Caches ain’t going to change anything, number one reason. It’s a proven FACT on my Members Only Caches that the swag stays better longer and less found by mugglies which means they last longer. The only reason I can contribute to this is that Premium Members care more about the sport and are more caring when out caching not to be spotted when hunting. If a family has only one Premium Membership, will show them how to log it. Long live “””Members Only Caches””” Joe Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 If I understand your premise, three dollars per month is all that preventing "free cachers" from having all the fun that "paying cachers" are having. So in your view, a cache that requires rappelling gear, or a 4wd vehicle to access is not exclusive? Have you ever looked into the cost of rappelling gear, or the cost of a 4wd vehicle? Or the cost of a GPSr, for that matter? I am aware that these items are expensive, but I think it's irrelevant. Anyone who'd bother to search for such a cache probably already has the equipment. And anyway, the requirement of rappelling gear is inherent in the siting of the cache itself. Making a cache PMO is simply an artificial barrier that has nothing to do with the nature of the cache. This is the highest cache in the lower 48 states. Peak-A-Boo: Mt. Whitney Since it isn't a PMOC, it isn't exclusive in your eyes, but I argue that it is a cache that excludes tens of thousands of cachers. Yes, but it excludes them for intrinsic reasons, not extrinsic ones. And that's the big difference. Being able to fork out three bucks won't make this cache available to everyone. Of course it won't, nor should it. IMHO, being able to fork out three bucks should not make the difference in making any cache accessible -- and that's what's wrong with PMOCs. I have no problem with the concept of premium membership, but I believe that its benefits should be in the area of site features, not in access to particular caches. Link to comment
+Always & Forever 5 Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 If you give the site money simply in return for the features you gain, then please, take the feature and a thank you but do not hide behind the self righteous "I am supporting the site", your simply buying more perceived product. Actually, pretty presumptious of you. I use the PQ's WAAAAYYYY more than I hunt for PMO caches. And, I am thankful, and I show my gratitude by paying my $30/yr to help support these features. Don't play semantics. ...however try to stay on the topic rather than resorting to personal attacks when you can not think of something else. You mean like calling people "self-righteous", right? Link to comment
marnen Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) The only reason I can contribute to this is that Premium Members care more about the sport Or they have more disposable income. Neither of these is a bad thing, but I don't think we can draw conclusions from the presence or absence of a premium membership. EDIT: I just realized I took your quote out of context, and that you were speaking hypothetically. Sorry. Edited May 7, 2007 by marnen Link to comment
+KoosKoos Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 PMOC's serve no useful purpose (yes, I have read the other threads) and seem to cause more angst than they are worth. Luckily I live in an area where they are more or less non-existent. If you give the site money simply in return for the features you gain, then please, take the feature and a thank you but do not hide behind the self righteous "I am supporting the site", your simply buying more perceived product. If they serve no useful purpose, why do so many people come on in support of them every time one of these threads pop up? I agree that there is some angst caused, but it seems to run as a small minority to those who support the MOC as a feature of the site and PM. They seem to serve a purpose for a lot of folks, so I say keep them as is. Link to comment
+ChileHead Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Don't like them, then don't plant them or find them. Easy. What's the big friggin deal? I want a Hummer Limo. It's just not fair that I don't have it. Link to comment
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 ..... completely unfair. What do all of you think? Yes, you are absolutely correct. It would be completely unfair to the site admin. to expect them to keep the site running for free. That is what you meant, wasn't it? Pretty sure that's what he meant Bud..... Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 .......Would you mind telling me the approximate area? I'd be extremely curious to look over the logs around there. ....It will also stop a lot of law-abiding cachers who aren't ready to pony up quite yet. There's gotta be a better way of doing this... ....Perhaps. Seems pretty marginal to me. Check my profile click on a recent find. You can look at all the caches in the area. Even the archived ones. There are a lot of those. Maybe there is a better way. If there is, it needs to be suggested and accepted better than PMO caches. I've tried at least one and got shot down in flames. Until then you can cache with a PM and then log your finds with a tad extra effort. I'd not go as far as that, but lacking precision would be fine. But sometimes you are working with perceptions, which are not measured with precision either. It's fuzzy nature is one of the constraints you work within. Link to comment
+Cardinal Red Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Geocaching.com exists to serve its users. <snip> ... Geocaching.com exists to serve its users customers. Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 PMOC's serve no useful purpose (yes, I have read the other threads) and seem to cause more angst than they are worth. I think you are wrong on both counts. First, they do serve a purpose, mainly for those who place them. Either by helping to preserve the cache's longevity, keeping the cache's swag from deteriorating so fast, and/or to simply see who is looking at the cache page. There are other reasons too i'm sure. Second, the little bit of angst that comes from these, and this is my opinion, is most likely coming from people who are new to the hobby and think everything should be free. This angst doesn't last long as they either lose interest and quit, or they pursue our hobby, realize they want to support and/or gain new benefits, and end up becoming premium members after awhile. Link to comment
+PJPeters Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 It's fair that I'm a paying member and I'm in Iraq with no more caches to find?I guess GC.com should refund my money then? First, thanks for the service. It is appreciated. It is hard to compare the two. Yours is one of a geographical nature, out of the control of GC. So you're suggesting that he should stop paying for premium membership simply because he's somewhere that's out of new caches for him? Link to comment
+genegene Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Just my 2 cents here, but i think that is a member you have the choice to do what you want with your cache, in the area that i live in and any surches i have done i have only seen one and that is in N.Y.. I can Understand why someone would do that, and that is becouse they want to keep good stuff in the cache, ie... more then just a golf ball and a 25 cent ring from a gumball machine. They might want to see a item in there that costs more then $1.00 in the cache. I am not a P.M. at this time, but when i can afford it I will become one, dont care about the F.T.F. but if i get one that is great. I was thinking about makeing a cache a P.M. only Just to keep some nice things in it, not sure yet. If I do that it will be my decision, If a non member asks I will tell them the cords but tell them to bring something worth trading. This comment was not ment to make fellow cachers mad, but to just add my thoughts to the pile. Sorry if you dont agree, but thats my 2 cents. Link to comment
+wimseyguy Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I think PM's should get even more then they already do. Link to comment
+DcCow Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) For the purposes of this post (and the rest of this topic if you use them), PM means premium members and PMO is premium member only cache. I really, really think the option to make a cache for PMs only should be eliminated. It is very annoying to search on here, find that a cache has been published that hasn't been there before, only to find that the owner has made it only for PMs. There are many times when this has happened to me, and I know of a few cachers who get the page published, set the cache for PMs only, and then enable it for everyone as soon as it has an FTF. Those are the caches I really don't like. I think we should all have a fair chance at getting an FTF, regardless of what cache it is or who the hider is. It also is unfair to some groups of people. For instance, and I do not want to get into a debate about pricing and whether this is cheap or expensive, but for some people $30 a year for a premium membership may be too much. I am a kid, and I can neither afford it nor get parental permission to mail the payment in or use a credit card. For kids, at least kids like me who can't get a membership, PMOs are completely unfair. What do all of you think? PMOs are just one among a package of benefits available to those who support this site (and our hobby) by becoming premium members. I enjoy setting my new caches to PMO for a while to see who is visiting the listing and sometime to allow others who support the site the FTF. Is this unfair? Probably, but so is that I pay to help support the site and you get to use it for free. Our society and life in general is not fair - otherwise we would all have everything everyone else has. The sooner you learn that the better. If you have enough motivation, I'm sure you can figure out a way to earn the money to help support this site also. DC Edited May 7, 2007 by DcCow Link to comment
+Driver Carries Cache Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I'm with Vinny on this one. That sounds like a lecture I got once. It was true then, and it's still true today. . I'd like to point out a few things that folk seem to be missing. Geocaching is FREE! You don't have to pay to geocache, you don't have to be a member to geocache... it is in fact completely free. There are places all over the web that list caches that are 100% free. Geocaching.com is a business brought to us by our friends at Groundspeak. In order to provide us with this well designed and well maintained community, they give you the option to pay for a Premium Membership (which many of us proudly and eagerly do)! What many don't realize is that rather than make the entire geocaching.com website a pay only service, they generously allow the majority of caches published to be made available to the geocaching community free of charge . Yes, you heard me right, completely free of charge. In a world where nothing is free... the majority of this site is! We don't hear anyone thanking Groundspeak for their incredible generosity (Thanks Groundspeak, we love ya!) instead we hear... "That isn't fair, why isn't it all free?". Well, life isn't fair, or free. Each geocache is the property of it's owner, they just happen to be listed on geocaching.com. If the owner wants to make the cache available only to members, only to his friends or only to his family that's his choice (although Groundspeak only offers two levels, public or Members Only). To the OP... I understand that it's frustrating to be essentially "locked out" of the Members Only caches, but like I said, we should be thankful for all the services that Groundspeak provides us for free. I think the "perks" that Groundspeak provides those of us who are Premium Members are a really nice bonus. And my best suggestion is that if you don't like "Members Only Caches" lead by example and go out and hide some public caches of your own! Driver Carries Cache Link to comment
Recommended Posts